> Well ... 32-bit software is 65536 times as good as 16-bit software isn't
> it?  Altium should be charging you $131 Million to upgrade.

32-bit software can also contain 65536 times as many bugs, right?  ;-)

Oh, boy, I can hardly wait for the 64-bit software coming soon!  By your
standard, to upgrade from 32-bit will cost $8.6E+12.  Yeah, 8.6 trillion
dollars.  By my standard, it will have 4 billion times as many bugs.  We
could both be right on this one!  ;-)

This could be a magnificent opportunity for another tech stock swindle, er,
I mean, rally!  Just start a consortium of EDA resellers, and go public
while claiming the projected market value of EDA is expected to grow to 8.6
trillion dollars by 2005 (which is the expected date of widespread
availability of 64-bit hardware, software, and OS).  All you need is for one
customer to upgrade, and the market projection will have been accurate!  You
can't lose!  ;-)

Seriously, though, I have said before that software pricing has become
ridiculous over the past decade.  Software price trends have been going the
wrong way.  Hardware keeps getting faster, smaller, and cheaper.  Software,
on the other hand, gets slower, larger, and more expensive.  Witness the
prices of Protel, Microsoft products, Adobe products, etc.  I think a lot of
the reasons for this are non-technical, but rather organizational.  For
example, when Protel set out to write the 32-bit Protel suite, they didn't
just start from scratch.  They re-used existing code from the 16-bit
release.  As any sane developer would.  But some greedo in marketing decided
that since it has twice as many "bits", they could charge twice as much for
it.  After all, why not?  The user base doesn't know any better, right?

My evaluation of Protel 99SE's value?  Let me put it this way.  If I was
forced to use v2.8 (16-bit), I could still do everything I need to do with
SCH and PCB design.  Do I want to use v2.8?  No, I'd rather use 99SE.  Why?
Integration works better between SCH and PCB, and the Design Explorer is
pretty handy (although still not perfect).  Do I think it was worth the
upgrade price?  Yes and no.  Yes, I liked the changes and the few added
capabilities.  No, I thought the upgrade price was too much.  So why did I
upgrade?  Because I hadn't upgraded since I bought v2.8, and I didn't want
to get too far behind the curve.  Do I think 99SE is perfect?  No.  They
should have kept the "Swap pins" feature from v2.8.  In fact, I still keep
v2.8 loaded on an old Win95 Pentium 200 in case I have a design that needs
to be optimized by manual pin swapping.  Will I upgrade to DXP?  Not anytime
soon.  Why not?  Lack of need, and resistance to the high upgrade pricing.
Will I ever upgrade again?  Probably, if improvements keep coming, and the
price doesn't keep rising, and no Linux-based EDA suites with similar
capabilities emerge.

Note to the license Nazis: that v2.8 license is on a PC that is on the same
desk as my PC with the 99SE license, therefore it is impossible for both
versions to be in use by more than one person simultaneously.  Especially
since both PC share one monitor, keyboard, and mouse through a KVM switch.
So there!

Best regards,
Ivan Baggett
Bagotronix Inc.
website:  www.bagotronix.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2003 8:02 PM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] Advanced Schematic on Win2k?

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
* Contact the list manager:
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to